ArticleNucleic acids research2025
Influence of contact map topology on RNA structure prediction.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The available sequence data of RNA molecules have greatly increased in the past years. Unfortunately, while computational power is still under exponential growth, the computer prediction quality from sequence to final structure is still inferior to labour-intensive experimental work. Although a reliable end-to-end procedure has already been developed for proteins since Alphafold2, while its successor AlphaFold3 can also predict RNA, its confidence, in particular for novel sequences and folds, still appears limited. Another strategy entails two steps: (i) predicting potential contacts in the form of a contact map from evolutionary data; and (ii) simulating the molecule with a physical force field while using the contact map as restraint. However, the quality of the structure prediction crucially depends on the quality of the contact map. Until now, only the proportion of true positive contacts was considered as a quality characteristic. We propose to also include the distribution of these contacts, and have done so in our recent studies. We observed that the clustering of contacts, as is common for many artificial intelligence algorithms, has a negative impact on prediction quality. In contrast, a more distributed topology is beneficial. We have applied these findings from computer experiments to current algorithms and introduced a measure of distribution, the Gaussian score.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.